English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The present manuscript compares Marine Isotope Stage 5 (MIS 5,125–115 kyr BP) and MIS 7 (236–229 kyr BP) with the aim to investigatethe origin of the difference in ice-sheet growth over the Northern Hemispherehigh latitudes between these last two inceptions. Our approach combines a lowresolution coupled atmosphere–ocean–sea-ice general circulation model and a3-D thermo-mechanical ice-sheet model to simulate the state of the ice sheetsassociated with the inception climate states of MIS 5 and MIS 7. Our resultsshow that external forcing (orbitals and GHG) and sea-ice albedo feedbacksare the main factors responsible for the difference in the land-ice initialstate between MIS 5 and MIS 7 and that our cold climate model bias impactsmore during a cold inception, such as MIS 7, than during a warm inception,such as MIS 5. In addition, if proper ice-elevation and albedo feedbacks arenot taken into consideration, the evolution towards glacial inception ishardly simulated, especially for MIS 7. Finally, results highlight that whilesimulated ice volumes for MIS 5 glacial inception almost fit withpaleo-reconstructions, the lack of precipitation over high latitudes,identified as a bias of our climate model, does not allow for a propersimulation of MIS 7 glacial inception

Modeling Northern Hemisphere ice-sheet distribution during MIS 5 and MIS 7 glacial inceptions